Güney Portekiz'deki Keler Folkloru ve Geleneksel Ekolojik Bilgisi: Koruma ve Bilim İçin Çıkarımlar

Öz

Geleneksel Ekolojik Bilgi (GEB) ve folklor, doğal yaşam ile ilgili büyük bilgi depolarıdır. İnsan topluluklarının yerel türlerle ilgili sahip oldukları fikir, algı ve görgül veriler, yeni bilimsel keşiflerin yapılmasına olanak sağlayan ve bir dizi koruma sorununu çözme potansiyeli sunan önemli kaynaklardır. Özellikle keler biyolojisi ve ekolojisi ile ilgili ana fikirleri anlamak amacıyla Güney Portekiz halkının, kelerler ile ilgili folklor ve GEB’ini belgeledik. Çalışmamızın sonuçları, keler ekolojisi ve biyolojisine ilişkin yerel bilgilerin hem doğru hem de yararlı olduğunu göstermektedir. Yerel sakinler tarafından sağlanan bilgilerin bir sonucu olarak, Hemidactylus turcicus’un mevcut coğrafi dağılımı hakkındaki bilgiler, dokuz yeni konumda varlıklarının bildirilmesiyle genişletilmiştir. Ayrıca, yerel halkın hala kelerlerin zehirli ve dermatolojik hastalıkların taşıyıcısı olduğu konusunda bazı yanlış anlamalara sahip olduğu açığa çıkarıldı. Bu fikirlerin varlığı, ahaliyi kelerlerden korkmaya ve onlardan nefret etmeye yöneltti. Bu durum da bu hayvanların karşı karşıya kaldığı en büyük koruma sorunlarından biri olan doğrudan işkenceye yol açtı. Hem bilimsel hem de çevreci bir bakış açısıyla, insanların hayvanlara yönelik bilgi ve algılarını anlamak önemlidir. Çünkü ancak o zaman şimdiye kadar onaylanmamış geçerli bilgiler ve koruma sorunları tespit edilip çözülebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gekkonidae
• Portekiz
• sürüngenlerin korunması
• folklor
• GEB

Folklore and Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Geckos in Southern Portugal: Implications for Conservation and Science

Öz

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and folklore are repositories of large amounts of information about the natural world. Ideas, perceptions and empirical data held by human communities regarding local species are important sources which enable new scientific discoveries to be made, as well as offering the potential to solve a number of conservation problems. We documented the gecko-related folklore and TEK of the people of southern Portugal, with the particular aim of understanding the main ideas relating to gecko biology and ecology. Our results suggest that local knowledge of gecko ecology and biology is both accurate and relevant. As a result of information provided by local inhabitants, knowledge of the current geographic distribution of Hemidactylus turcicus was expanded, with its presence reported in nine new locations. It was also discovered that locals still have some misconceptions of geckos as poisonous and carriers of dermatological diseases. The presence of these ideas has led the population to a fear of and aversion to geckos, resulting in direct persecution being one of the major conservation problems facing these animals. It is essential, from both a scientific and conservationist perspective, to understand the knowledge and perceptions that people have towards the animals, since, only then, may hitherto unrecognized pertinent information and conservation problems be detected and resolved.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gekkonidae
• Portugal
• reptile conservation
• folklore
• TEK

Kaynakça

1. Georges RA, Jones MO: Folkloristics: an Introduction Indiana: Indiana University Press; 1995.
2. Medin D, Atran S: Folk Biology MIT Press; 1999.
3. Berkes F, Colding J, Folkem C: Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptative management. Ecological Applications 2000, 10:1251-1262.
4. Ramstad KM, Nelson NJ, Paine G, Beech D, Paul A, Paul P, Allendorf FW, Daugherty CH: Species and Cultural Conservation in New Zealand: Maori Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Tuatara. Conservation Biology 2007, 21:455-464.
5. Lingard M, Raharison N, Rabakonandrianina E, Rakotoarisoa J, Elmqvist T: The role of local taboos in conservation and management of species: The radiated tortoise in Southern Madagascar. Conservation and Society 2003, 1:223-246.
6. Barre RY, Grant M, Draper D: The role of taboos in conservation of sacred groves in Ghana’s Tallensi-Nabdam district. Social & Cultural Geography 2007, 10:25-39.
7. Cinner JE: The role of taboos in conserving coastal resources in Madagascar. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin 2007, 22:15-23.
8. Jones JP, Andriamarovololona M, Hockley N: The importance of taboos and social norms to conservation in Madagascar. Conservation Biology 2008, 22:976-986.

9. Obasohan EE: Fisheries biodiversity: The role of a tradtional taboo/ritual prohibition in the managment and conservation of the fish resources of Ibiekuma Stream in Ekpoma, Edo state, Nigeria. Bioscience research communications 2008, 20:257-264.
10. Gupta V: Conservation ethos in the tribal folklore. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 2007, 6:337-341.
11. Riley EP: The importance of human-macaque folklore for conservation in Lore Lindu National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia. Oryx 2010, 44:235-240.
12. Bauer AM, Russel AP: Hoplodactylus delcourti (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) dand the kawekaweau of Maori folklore. Journal of Ethnobiology 1987, 7:83-91.
13. Ferguson MAD, Messier F: Collection and analysis of traditional ecological knowledge about a population of Arctic tundra caribou. Artic 1997, 50:17-28.
14. Huntington H: Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: methods and applications. Ecological Applications 2000, 10:1270-1274.
15. Turner NJ, Ignace M, Ignace R: Traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom of aboriginal peoples in British Columbia. Ecological Applications 2000, 10:1275-1287.
16. Johannes RE, Yeeting B: I-Kiribati knowledge and management of Tarawa’s lagoon resources. Atoll Research Bulletin 2001, 489:1-24.
17. Sandström P, Edenius L, Tømmervik H, Hagner O, Hemberg L, Olsson H, Baer K, Stenlund T, Brandt LG, Egberth M: Conflict resolution by participatory management: remote sensing and GIS as tools for communicating land-use needs for reindeer herding in Northern Sweden. Ambio 2003, 32:557-567.
18. Moller H, Berkes F, Lyver PO, Kislalioglu M: Combining Science and Traditional Ecological knowledge: monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology and Society 2004, 9:2.
19. Drew JA: Use of traditional ecological knowledge in marine conservation. Conservation Biology 2005, 19:1286-1293.
20. Alves RRN, Vieira WLS, Santana GG: Reptiles used in traditional folk medicine: conservation implications. Biodiversity and Conservation 2008, 17:2037-2049.
21. Walsh M: Snakes on the Usangu Plains: an Introduction to Saigu Ethnoherpetology. East Africa Natural History Society Bulletin 1995, 25:38-43.
22. Walsh M: Swahili Ethnoherpetology: Notes From Central Ugunja. East Africa Natural History Bulletin 1996, 26:18-22.
23. Goodman SM, Hobbs J: The distribution and ethnozoology of reptiles of the northern portion of the egyptian eastern desert. Journal of Ethnobiology 1994, 14:75-100.
24. Alves RRN, Filho GAP, Delima YCC: Snakes used in Ethnomedicine in Northeast Brazil. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2007, 9:455-464.
25. Barbosa AR, Nishida AK, Costa ES, Cazé AR: Abordagem etnoherpetologica de São José da Mata - Paraíba - Brasil. Revista de Biologia e Ciências da Terra 2007, 7:117-123.
26. Alves RRN, Filho GAP: Commercialization and use of snakes in North and Northeastern Brazil: implications for conservation and management. Biodiversity Conservation 2007, 16:969-985. Alves RRN, Santana GG: Use and commercialization of Podocnemis expansa (Schweiger 1812)(Testudines: Podocnemididae) for medicinal purposes in two communities in North of Brazil. Journal of Etnhobiology and Ethnomedicine 2008, 4:3.
27. Fita DS, Neto EMC, Schiavetti A: ’Offensive’ snakes: cultural beliefs and practices related to snakebites in a Brazilian rural settlement. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2010, 6:13.
28. Frembgen JW: The folklore of geckos: Ethnographic data from south and west asia. Asian Folklore Studies 1996, 55:135-143.
29. Das I: The Serpent Tongue: A contribution to the ethnoherpetology of India and adjacent countries. Frankfurt am Maim: Edition Chimaira; 1998.
30. Sasaki K, Sasaki Y, Fox S: Endagered Traditional beliefs in Japan: Influences on Snake Conservation. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 2010, 5:474-485.
31. Somaweera R, Somaweera N: Serpents in jars: the snake wine industry in Vietnam. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2010, 2:1251-1260.
32. Bertrand H: Contribution à l’étude de l’herpetologie et de l’ethnoherpetologie en Anjeur. Bulletin de la Societé herpetologique de France 1997, 83:51-62.
33. Prokop P, Ozel M, Usak M: Cross-Cultural Comparison of Student Attitudes toward Snakes. Society and Animals 2009, 17:224-240.
34. Tomazic I: Pre-Service Biology Teacher’s and Primary School Students’ Attitudes Toward and Knowledge about Snakes. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology 2011, 7:161-171.
35. Brito JC, Rebelo A, Crespo EG: Viper killings for superstitious reasons in Portugal. Bolletin Asociacion Herpetologica Española 2001, 12:101-104.
36. Ceríaco L: Gecko’s Folklore in Portuguese Oral Tradition. Proceedings of the international conference on oral tradition - Orality and cultural heritage: 11-13 November 2010; Ourense 2010, 211-217.
37. Ceríaco L: Human Attitudes towards Herpetofauna: How preferences, fear and beliefs can influence the conservation of reptiles and amphibians. Universidade de Évora; 2010.
38. Myers N, Mittermeir R, Mittermeir CG, Fonseca GAB, Kent J: Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 2000, 403:853-858.
39. Rivas-Martinez : Mapa de series, geoseries y geopermaseries de vegetación de España. Itinera Geobotanica 2007, 17:5-436.
40. Costa JC, Aguiar C, Capelo J, Lousa MF, Neto C: Biogeografia de Portugal Continental. Quercetea 1998, 0:5-56.
41. Loureiro A, Ferrand de Almeida N, Carretero MA, Paulo OS: Atlas dos Anfíbios e Répteis de Portugal Lisboa: Esfera do Caos Editores; 2010.
42. Blondel J, Aronson J: Biology and Wildlife of the Mediterranean Region Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.
43. Mattoso J, Daveau S, Belo D: Portugal - O Sabor da Terra Rio Tinto: Círculo de Leitores; 2010.
44. Ramos R: História de Portugal Lisboa: A Esfera dos Livros; 2009.
45. Henkel F, Schmidt W: Geckos Stuttgart: Eugen Ulmer; 1991.
46. Zug GR: Herpetology, an Introductory Biology of Amphibians and Reptiles San Diego: Academic Press; 1993.
47. Autumn K, Peattie A: Mechanisms of Adhesion in Geckos. Integrative and Comparative Biology 2002, 42:1081-1090.
48. Frankenberg E: Vocal behavior of the Mediterranean House Gecko, Hemidactylus turcicus. Copeia 1982, 4:770-775.
49. Ferrand N, Ferrand de Almeida P, Gonçalves H, Sequeira F, Teixeira J, Ferrand de Almeida F: Guia dos Anfíbios e Répteis de Portugal Porto: Guias Fapas & Câmara Municipal do Porto; 2001.
50. Cabral MJ, Almeida J, Almeida PR, Dellinger T, Ferrand de Almeida N, Oliveira ME, Palmeirim JM, Queiroz AI, Rogado L, Santos-Reis M: Livro Vermelho dos Vertebrados de Portugal Lisboa: Instituto da Conservação da Natureza/Assírio & Alvim; 2006.
51. Mateus O, Jacinto J: Hemidactylus turcicus. In Atlas dos Anfíbios e Répteis de Portugal. Edited by: Loureiro A, Ferrand de Almeida N, Carretero MA, Paulo OS. Lisboa: Esfera do Caos Editores; 2010:130-131.
52. Malkmus R: Amphibians and Reptiles of Portugal, Madeira and the Azores-Archipelago. Distribution and Natural History Ruggell: A. R. G. Gantner Verlag K. G; 2004.
53. Huntington H: Observations on the utility of the semi-directive interview for documenting traditional ecological knowledge. Artic 1997, 51:237-242.
54. Ceríaco L, Marques M: Hemidactylus turcicus: Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 2011, 41:113.
55. Corriente F: Adições aos arabismos do português. Revista de Estudos Árabes e das Culturas do Médio Oriente 2004, 1:10-15.
56. Serra PC: Um arabismo português: Osga. Boletim de filologia 1974, 23:277-279.
57. Kellert S: Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology 1993, 7:845-855.
58. Knight J: “Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my!” How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2008, 28:94-103.
59. Czech B, Krausman P, Borkhartaria R: Social construction, political power, and allocation of benefits to endagered species. Conservation Biology 1998, 12:1103-1112.
60. Woods B: Beauty and the Beast: Preferences for animals in Australia. The Journal of Tourism Studies 2000, 11:25-35.
61. Sutherland WJ: Parallel extinction risk and global distribution of languages and people. Nature 2003, 423:276-279.
62. Cox NA, Temple HJ: European red List of Reptiles Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2009.
63. Whitaker PB, Shine R: Sources of mortality of large elapid snakes in an agricultural landscape. Journal of Herpetology 2000, 34:121-128.